Providers and Patients Caught Between Standardization and Individualization: Individualized Standardization as a Solution Comment on "(Re) Making the Procrustean Bed? Standardization and Customization as Competing Logics in Healthcare"

Abstract

In their 2017 article, Mannion and Exworthy provide a thoughtful and theory-based analysis of two parallel trends in modern healthcare systems and their competing and conflicting logics: standardization and customization. This commentary further discusses the challenge of treatment decision-making in times of evidence-based medicine (EBM), shared decision-making and personalized medicine. From the perspective of systems theory, we propose the concept of individualized standardization as a solution to the problem. According to this concept, standardization is conceptualized as a guiding framework leaving room for individualization in the patient physician interaction. The theoretical background is the concept of context management according to systems theory. Moreover, the comment suggests multidisciplinary teams as a possible solution for the integration of standardization and individualization, using the example of multidisciplinary tumor conferences and highlighting its limitations. The comment also supports the authors’ statement of the patient as co-producer and introduces the idea that the competing logics of standardization and individualization are a matter of perspective on macro, meso and micro levels.

Exploring healthcare professionals’ knowledge, attitudes and experiences of shared decision making in rheumatology

“…This result suggests that, in some clinical practices more than others, healthcare professionals feel pressured to strictly follow these guidelines 30. Since clinical practice guidelines do not encompass recommendations for individual patients, deviations may be necessary to ensure that patients are treated as individuals 30–33. Moreover, the American College of Rheumatology and European League Against Rheumatism state that their guidelines are not meant to be prescriptive and warrant SDM 6 7…”

Patients’ perspectives of facilitators and barriers to patient-centred care: insights from qualitative patient interviews

“…Interventions intended to improve PCC need to be voluntary and despite being structured leave room for individual adaptations such as extending monitoring intervals in case of stable conditions or high adherence to care plans. 49 Next to medical patient information, PCC could be strengthened by structured support in navigating through the care system. 50 This navigation can be implemented for example, by GPs providing recommendations for specific specialist.…”

A multi-approach management intervention can lower C-section rate trends: The experience of a Third Level Referral Center

“…Consequently, it is not possible to conclude that the multifaceted intervention or its sequence by itself led to a better outcome. Furthermore, content validity could be improved by adding qualitative indicator, such as patient's perspective, to assess improvements from multiple angles, as reported by Ansmann et al [30] These improvements are foreseen, but should still be implemented in our hospital monitoring system by introducing other metrics such as quality of life or functional status assessment.…”